Research

In their best interests

News stories of children suffering from abuse and neglect at the hands of their parents or carers are something we see all too often, and they never fail to shock us.

The most recent case of Baby Peter is still making headlines three and a half years after his death at the hands of his mother and her partner, and many questions have been raised over the involvement of professionals whose role it was to protect the child who had been identified as ‘at risk of maltreatment’.

A team from Loughborough’s Centre for Child and Family Research have examined the decision-making processes of professionals with responsibility for the protection and promotion of the welfare of children who are suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm before their first birthday. Debbie Hughes went to meet Professor Harriet Ward who led the research.

If the welfare of the child is indeed the paramount consideration, then professionals and policy makers need to ask much more stringent questions concerning what constitutes acceptable or unacceptable levels of parenting

Decisions made by practitioners to protect and promote the welfare of infants who are suffering or at risk of significant harm are extremely difficult and will have long-term consequences for their life chances. So, in a bid to determine how such decisions are made, and whether they can be improved, the Department for Children, Schools and Families, now the Department for Education, turned to Loughborough’s Centre for Child and Family Research (CCFR).

They conducted a study across ten UK local authorities, focusing on a sample of 57 children, who became looked-after before they were one, or were the subject of a core assessment or a ‘Section 47’ enquiry – an investigation that Children’s Services carry out when they have reasonable cause to believe that a child living in their area has suffered or is likely to suffer significant harm. Forty three of those included in the study were followed until they were three years old.